Power Up Power Line

The indispensable Power Line blog has a nice piece entitled 'How Will They Attack Roberts?' examining the likely ways that Democrats and liberals (I know -- it's redundant) will try to smear John Roberts. As usual, it is good analysis.

I differ on a couple of points though:

Power Line: "Most of it [the opposition research issued by People for the American Way] deals with Roberts' tenure as deputy Solicitor General. In that capacity, for example, [Roberts] wrote a brief that argued that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be reversed. [The problem] with these attacks on Roberts' briefs. ... [T]he Solicitor General has a client: the President and his administration. He doesn't just make stuff up, he argues the position that is formulated by the President, the Attorney General and other policy makers."

This, of course, makes perfect sense. The role of an attorney is to be an effective advocate for your client, even if you don't necessarily like or agree with your client. The problem, which we'll soon see, is that it would take some integrity and honesty to acknowledge this point. These are qualities lacking in most liberals today -- and are non-existent in Kennedy, Leahy, Schumer, Kerry, Clinton, et al. So, look for the Dems on the Senate Judiciary Committee during the hearings and in the Senate as a whole during the confirmation process to attack Roberts incessantly as a rabid, "anti-choice" fanatic.

Power Line: "The Democrats also will want to talk about Hedgepeth v. Washington Metro Authority, in which a twelve-year-old girl was taken into custody, handcuffed, and driven to police headquarters because she ate a french fry in a Washington metro station. Roberts wrote the opinion for the D.C. Circuit, affirming a district court decision that dismissed the girl's complaint ... .

***

The Hedgepeth case may tug at certain heartstrings, but it plainly was decided correctly. Roberts wrote for a 3-0 panel affirming a district court decision, so the conclusion was unanimous. It's hard to paint a judge who is part of a unanimous consensus as "out of the mainstream." "

Again, this makes perfect sense. But, again, my point is that logic, reason, civility, etc. are not concepts we're going to see from the Democrats. In fact, I think the Hedgepeth case may be Exhibit #1 in the liberal attack strategy on Roberts.

1. Observers would have to listen carefully to understand the issues in this case. The case Roberts decided was not whether a twelve-year-old girl should have been arrested for eating french fries. It was to determine whether the lower court erred in upholding the girl's arrest.

2. This subtlety will likely be lost on most Americans. And the liberal activist groups and Democrats will rely on this. I suspect that by the time these folks are done spinning their lies and distortions, it will look to some people that Roberts was the judge who had this girl thrown in jail.